Notice
As part of Phase 3 of our return to campus plan, most units will now run tutorials, seminars and other small group learning activities on campus for the second half-year, while keeping an online version available for those students unable to return or those who choose to continue their studies online.
To check the availability of face to face activities for your unit, please go to timetable viewer. To check detailed information on unit assessments visit your unit's iLearn space or consult your unit convenor.
Unit convenor and teaching staff |
Unit convenor and teaching staff
Sheila Degotardi
|
---|---|
Credit points |
Credit points
10
|
Prerequisites |
Prerequisites
[Admission to MTeach(0-5) and (ECED603 or ECHE6030) and (ECED602 or ECHE6020) and (ECED824 or ECHE8240)] or [admission to MEChild or MEd or MEdLead or MIndigenousEd or MSpecEd or GradCertEdS]
|
Corequisites |
Corequisites
|
Co-badged status |
Co-badged status
|
Unit description |
Unit description
The recognition of the importance of children's first three years of life has led to an increasing awareness of the specialist nature of infant-toddler education and care services. This unit covers contemporary perspectives that can inform educational programs that aim to support infant-toddler development and learning. Students will build on prior knowledge about children's learning and development to critically reflect on research-based literature and examine its relevance in a range of infant-toddler early childhood programs. Students will design and implement an inquiry-based project to deepen their understanding of the applicability of this knowledge to infants and toddlers, their families and educators.
|
Information about important academic dates including deadlines for withdrawing from units are available at https://www.mq.edu.au/study/calendar-of-dates
On successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:
This Unit Guide provides a brief description only of each required assessment piece. Full instructions are provided via an assessment and assignment guide, available on the iLearn site. An assessment rubric will be available to students for each assessment piece prior at least 2 weeks prior to submission.
In order to achieve a passing grade, it is expected that all assignments are completed, and that all assignments demonstrate a serious attempt to address the assignment task.
Assignment 1 is submitted via the VoiceThread link on ilearn, with accompanying files submitted via the Assignment links on the ECED/ECHX832 iLearn site. Assignments 2, 3 and 4 are submitted via the assignment link. These assignment submission links assess the documents via TURNITIN, which permits online assessment as well as the detection of material copied from other sources. Please ensure that all material is written and referenced according to standard academic conventions.
Assignments are due before midnight on the specified date.
IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHECK THAT YOUR SUBMISSION HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL AND TAKE ANY MEASURES TO ENSURE THAT YOUR ASSIGNMENT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE TURNITIN SITE BY THE DUE TIME AND DATE. YOU MUST ALLOW SUFFICIENT TIME FOR YOUR ONLINE SUBMISSION TO BE PROCESSED, AS LATE SUBMISSIONS DUE TO LAST MINUTE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES WILL INCUR LATENESS PENALTIES.
When preparing your assignments, it is essential that:
All written submissions are to be legible and professionally presented. Please follow these guidelines when you submit each assignment:
All sections of the assignment, apart from references and appendices, are included in the word or duration limit. If your assignment seriously exceeds the limit, it will be marked only to the point at which the limit is reached.
The nature of scholarly endeavour, dependent as it is on the work of others, binds all members of the University community to abide by the principles of academic honesty.
Plagiarism is a matter of particular importance. Plagiarism is defined as using the work or ideas of another person and presenting this as your own without clear acknowledgement of the source of the work or ideas. This includes, but is not limited to, any of the following acts:
The University’s Academic Honesty Policy can be found on the Policy Central website: http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/index.html
TURNITIN is used to assist students with appropriate referencing and paraphrasing, and to detect plagiarism. The system also serves as a digital repository if anything should happen to your hard copy submission or personal backup. Please ensure you have stated your TURNITIN receipt number on your coversheet. A link to TURNITIN is embedded in iLearn.
Applications for extensions must be made via AskMQ at https://ask.mq.edu.au as a Special Consideration request before the submission date. Students who experience a disruption to their studies through ill-health or misadventure are able to apply for this request. Extensions can only be granted if they meet the Special Considerations policy and are submitted via https://ask.mq.edu.au/. This will ensure consistency in the consideration of such requests is maintained.
In general, there should be no need for extensions except through illness or misadventure that would be categorised as unavoidable disruption according to the University definition of same, see: https://students.mq.edu.au/study/my-study-program/special-consideration
Late submissions without extension will receive a penalty of 2% reduction of the total possible mark for each day late (including weekends and public holidays). Late penalties are applied by unit convenors or their delegates after tasks are assessed. No assignment will be accepted more than seven (7) days (incl. weekends) after the original submission deadline.
No assessable work will be accepted after the return/release of marked work on the same topic. If a student is still permitted to submit on the basis of unavoidable disruption, an alternative topic may be set.
Students should keep an electronic file of all assessments. Claims regarding "lost" assessments cannot be made if the file cannot be produced. It is also advisable to keep an electronic file of all drafts and the final submission on a USB untouched/unopened after submission. This can be used to demonstrate easily that the assessment has not been amended after the submission date.
If you have evidence that your task has been incorrectly assessed against the grade descriptors you can request a re-mark. To request a re-mark you need to contact the unit convenor within 7 days of the date of return of the assignment and provide a detailed assessment of your script against the task criteria. Evidence from your assignment must be provided to support your judgments.
Note: Failed assessments can not be re-submitted as they are all double-marked as a part of the moderation process.
Also note: The outcome of a re-mark may be a higher/lower or unchanged grade. Grades are standards referenced and effort is NOT a criterion.
Criteria for awarding grades for assessment tasks
Assignments will be awarded grades ranging from HD to F according to guidelines set out in the University's Grading Policy. The following descriptive criteria are included for your information.
Note: If you fail a unit with a professional experience component the fail grade will be on your transcript irrespective of the timing of when the placement takes place.
Criteria for awarding grades in the unit
Students will be awarded grades ranging from HD to F according to guidelines set out in the policy: https://staff.mq.edu.au/work/strategy-planning-and-governance/university-policies-and-procedures/policies/assessment-in-effect-from-session-2-2016
The following generic grade descriptors provide university-wide standards for awarding final grades.
Grade |
Descriptor |
HD (High Distinction) |
Provides consistent evidence of deep and critical understanding in relation to the learning outcomes. There is substantial originality and insight in identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem solving approaches; critical evaluation of problems, their solutions and their implications; creativity in application as appropriate to the discipline. |
D (Distinction) |
Provides evidence of integration and evaluation of critical ideas, principles and theories, distinctive insight and ability in applying relevant skills and concepts in relation to learning outcomes. There is demonstration of frequent originality in defining and analysing issues or problems and providing solutions; and the use of means of communication appropriate to the discipline and the audience. |
Cr (Credit) |
Provides evidence of learning that goes beyond replication of content knowledge or skills relevant to the learning outcomes. There is demonstration of substantial understanding of fundamental concepts in the field of study and the ability to apply these concepts in a variety of contexts; convincing argumentation with appropriate coherent justification; communication of ideas fluently and clearly in terms of the conventions of the discipline. |
P (Pass). |
Provides sufficient evidence of the achievement of learning outcomes. There is demonstration of understanding and application of fundamental concepts of the field of study; routine argumentation with acceptable justification; communication of information and ideas adequately in terms of the conventions of the discipline. The learning attainment is considered satisfactory or adequate or competent or capable in relation to the specified outcomes |
F (Fail) |
Does not provide evidence of attainment of learning outcomes. There is missing or partial or superficial or faulty understanding and application of the fundamental concepts in the field of study; missing, undeveloped, inappropriate or confusing argumentation; incomplete, confusing or lacking communication of ideas in ways that give little attention to the conventions of the discipline. |
Name | Weighting | Hurdle | Due |
---|---|---|---|
Video-Log Reading Reflection | 15% | No | 14th August and 4th September |
Research Project Proposal | 30% | No | 16th September |
Presentation and peer feedback | 15% | No | 24th October |
Project final report | 40% | No | 8th November |
Assessment Type 1: Participatory task
Indicative Time on Task 2: 12 hours
Due: 14th August and 4th September
Weighting: 15%
Students complete two 5-8 minute video-log critical reflections on a chosen reading
Assessment Type 1: Project
Indicative Time on Task 2: 30 hours
Due: 16th September
Weighting: 30%
Students submit a written proposal for an individual inquiry project (Approximately 1800 words)
Assessment Type 1: Presentation
Indicative Time on Task 2: 13 hours
Due: 24th October
Weighting: 15%
Students complete a 10-minute presentation on their project progress and provide written peer feedback
Assessment Type 1: Project
Indicative Time on Task 2: 50 hours
Due: 8th November
Weighting: 40%
Students complete a final report and critical discussion of their project findings (Approximately 2200 words)
1 If you need help with your assignment, please contact:
2 Indicative time-on-task is an estimate of the time required for completion of the assessment task and is subject to individual variation
The unit content, delivered via unit readings and assignment tasks, is supported by VoiceThread interactive discussion / presentation forums, Zoom online webinar meetings and regular ilearn discussion forum tools.
The process for attending small group or individual Zoom meetings will be arranged at the beginning of the session. It is expected that students will engage in one Zoom session with the unit convener before their submission of assignment 2: Project proposal. The precise date and times of these sessions will be determined early in the study session, and will depend upon the availability and time-zones of students and the unit convener.
Individual consultations with the unit convener
The unit convener is available for individual consultations via email or Zoom. Please contact her via the ilearn dialogue for an appointment to chat.
There is a website for this unit. Access to this unit is available online through iLearn (ilearn.mq.edu.au). You will need to login using your Macquarie ID. This site is an essential unit resource. You are required to check this website at least twice per week for any announcements. In addition, it has the following features and functions:
Study and assignment resources
Assignment submission links: For you to submit your assignment work
Dialogue: for private messages to teaching staff.
Please note that teaching staff will respond to dialogue emails in a timely manner. Please be aware that they have multiple teaching, research and administrative commitments so it may take a couple of days to respond. It is unrealistic to expect teaching staff to respond after work hours or during weekend.
There is no required text for this unit. Instead, you will be provided with some research-based literature for weeks 1 to 6, and are then expected to source your own literature to assist with the completion of your assignments.
The required readings are listed in the Weekly content section of this Unit Guide. These readings can all be found using multisearch function, or by accessing the specific journal via the library website. A Leganto reading list has also been established for your convenience.
There are also many pedagogical or development books about infant and toddlers in the library. The following list contains some research-based literature that pertains specifically to infant-toddler curriculum, pedagogy and development.
Research-based books
Abbott, L., & Langston, A. (2002) Birth to three matters: A framework to support children in their earliest years. London, DfES/Surestart.
Berthelsen, D., Brownlee, J. & Johansson, E. (Eds.) (2009). Participatory learning in the early years: Research and pedagogy, Oxon, UK, Routledge.
Degotardi, S., & Pearson, E (2014). The relationship worlds of infants and toddlers: Multiple perspectives from early years research and practice. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Elfer, P., Goldschmied, E., & Selleck, D. (2003). Key persons in the nursery: Building relationships for quality provision. London: David Fulton Publishers.
Gandini, L. & Edwards, C. P. (2001) Bambini: The Italian approach to infant/toddler care, New York, Teachers College Press.
Goouch, K., & Powell, S. (2013). The baby room: Principles, policy and practice. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press
Gopnik, A. (2009) The philosophical baby, New York, NY, Farra, Straus and Giroux.
Johansson, E., & White, E.J (2011). Educational research with our youngest: Voices of infants and toddlers. Dordrecht: Springer
Lamb, M. E., Bornstein, M. & Teti, D. M. (2002) Development in infancy, Mahwah, N.J, Erlbaum.
Nelson, K. (2007) Young minds in social worlds: Experience, meaning, and memory Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
Rochat, P. (2001) The infant's world, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
Harrison, L., & Sumsion, J. (2014). Lived spaces of infant-toddler education and care: Exploring diverse perspectives on theory, research and practice. Dordrecht, The Nederlands: Springer.
Wittmer, D. (2008) Focusing on peers: The importance of relationships in the early years, Washington, DC, Zero to Three.
White, E.J & Dalli, C. (Eds.). Under-three Year Olds in Policy and Practice. Singapore: Springer
Some suggested book chapters (although see above for edited books in infant-toddler ECEC):
Brooker, L. (2009) Just like having a best friend: How babies and toddlers construct relationships with their key workers in nurseries. In Papatheodorou, T. & Moyles, J. (Eds.) Learning together in the early years: Exploring relational pedagogy. Oxon, UK, Routledge.
Degotardi, S. (2015) Expressing, interpreting and exchanging perspectives during infant-toddler social interactions: The significance of acting with others in mind. In L. Harrison and J Sumsion (Eds). Lived spaces of infant-toddler education and care: exploring diverse perspectives on theory, research and practice, pp187-199.. Dordrecht, The Nederlands: Springer.
Hay, D. F., Caplan, M. & Nash, A. (2009). The beginnings of peer relations. In Rubin, K. H., Bukowski, W. M. & Laurson, B. (Eds.) Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups. New York, The Guilford Press.
Mitchelmore, S., Degotardi, S., & Fleet, A. (2017). The richness of everyday moments: Bringing visibility to the qualities of care within pedagogical spaces (87-99). In White, E.J and Dalli, C. (Eds.). Under-three Year Olds in Policy and Practice. Singapore: Springer
Singer, E. & De Haan, D. (2007) Social life of young children: Co-contruction of shared meanings and togetherness, humour, and conflicts in child care centres. In Spodek, B. & Saracho, O. N. (Eds.) Contemporary perspectives on research in early childhood social learning. Charlotte, N.C., Information Age Publishers.
Journal Special Issues
Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 18(4): Special Issue: (Re)-conceptualising relationships in infant-toddler pedagogy
Early Education and Development, 27 (2): Special Issue: Infants and toddlers in group care
Early Years: An International Research Journal, 32 (2): Special issue: Professional issues in work with babies and toddlers
European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19 (2): Special Issue – Birth to three
International Journal of Early Childhood, 10 (1): Special issue on children under 3
Week beginning |
Topic |
Prescribed readings |
||
27th July |
Conceptualisations of ‘quality’ in infant-toddler early childhood programs |
Read at least 3 from: Degotardi, S. & Pearson, (2014). The relationship worlds of infants and toddlers: Multiple perspectives from early years theory and practice (Chapter 1) . Maidenhead, Open University Press. Degotardi, S., Han, F., & Torr, J. (2018). Infants’ experience with ‘near and clear’ educator talk: individual variation and its relationship to indicators of quality. International Journal of Early Years Education, doi: 10.1080/09669760.2018.1479632 King, E. K., Pierro, R. C., Li, J., Porterfield, M. L., & Rucker, L. (2016). Classroom quality in infant and toddler classrooms: impact of age and programme type. Early Child Development and Care, 25, 875-893. doi:10.1080/03004430.2015.1134521 La Paro, K. & Gloeckler, L. (2016). The context of child care for toddlers: The “experience expectable environment”. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44, 147-153. doi: 10.1007/s10643-015-0699-0 Li, W., Farkas, G., Duncan, G., Burchinal, M. R., & Vandell, D. (2013). Timing of high quality child care and contiive, language, and preacademic development. Developmental Psychology, 49(8), 1440-1451. doi:10.1037/a0030613 Pessanha, M., Peixoto, C., Barros, S., Cadima, J., Pinto, A. I., Coelho, V., & Bryant, D. M. (2017). Stability and change in teacher-infant interaction quality over time. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 40, 87-97. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.10.003 Thomason, S. A., & La Paro, K. (2009). Measuring the quality of teacher-child interactions in toddler child care. Early Education and Development, 20, 285-304. doi: 10.1080=10409280902773351 |
||
3rd Aug |
Challenges and debates |
Read at least 3 from: Cheeseman, S. (2017). Narratives of infants’ encounters with curriculum: Beyond the curriculum of care. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 18(1), 55-66. doi:10.1177/1463949117692243 Cheeseman, S., Sumsion, J., & Press, F. (2015). Infants of the productivity agenda: Learning from birth or waiting to learn. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(3) 38-45. Clark, R. M. & Baylis, S. (2012) 'Wasted down there': Policy and practice with the under-threes. Early Years: Journal of International Research and Development, 32, 229-242. Davis, B., & Degotardi, S. (2015). Who cares: Infant educators' responses to professional discourses of care. Early Child Development and Care. doi:10.1080/03004430.2015.1028385 Davis, B. & Dunn, R. (2019). Professional identity in the infant room. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, Doi: 10.1177/1836939119855222 Elfer, P., & Page, J. (2015). Pedagogy with babies: perspectives of eight nursery managers. Early Child Development and Care, 1-21. doi:10.1080/03004430.2015.1028399 Leifield, L. (2020). Influential others: Infant/toddler teachers’ perspectives on entry into and retention in the infant/toddler workforce. Early Years: An International Research journal. Doi:10.1080/09575146.2020.1771546 Tesar, M, & Farquhar, S (2015). A day in the life of a newly qualified infant/toddler teacher. The First Years: Nga Tau Tuatahi. New Zealand Journal of Infant and Toddler Education. Volume 17(1), 17-21. |
||
10th Aug |
Conceptualising curriculum 1: Play and exploration |
Read at least 3 from: Degotardi, S., & Pearson, E. (2016). Infant Play: How Interactions Build and Support Relationships. In M. Ebbeck and M. Waniganayeke (Eds.), Children’s play in early childhood education: Facilitating learning in diverse contexts, 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press. Degotardi, S. (2013). "I think, I can": Acknowledging and promoting agency during educator-infant play. In O. F. Lillemyr, S. Dockett, & B. Perry (Eds.), Varied perspectives on play and learning: Theory and research on early years education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Kleppe, R., (2018). Affordances for 1- to 3-year olds’ risky play in early childhood education and care. Journal of Early Childhood Research, doi: 10.1177/1476718X18762237 Morrissey, A (2014). Scaffolding, analysis and materials: Contributing factors in an unexpected finding of advanced infant/toddler pretend play. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 12(2), 195-213. doi: 10.1177/1476718X13515428 Ridgway, A., Li, L., & Quiñones, G. (2016). Visual narrative methodology in educational research with babies: triadic play in babies’ room. Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 1(1), 1. doi:10.1186/s40990-016-0005-0 Salamon, A., & Harrison, L. (2015). Early childhood educators' conceptions of infants' capabilities: the nexus between beliefs and practice. Early Years: An International Research Journal, 35(3), 273-288. doi:10.1080/09575146.2015.1042961 Shin, M. (2012) The role of joint attention in social communication and play among infants. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 10, 309-317. Shohet, C., & Klein, P.S. (2010). Effects of variations in toy presentation on social behaviour of infants and toddlers in childcare. Early Child Development and Care, 180(6) 823-824, doi: 10.1080/03004430802460997 |
||
Video-Log entry 1 due Friday 14th August |
||||
17th Aug |
Conceptualising curriculum 2: Routines, rituals and interactions |
Read at least 3 from: Albon, G., & Barnes, J. (2009). Investigating sleep routines in early childhood care and education centres. The First Years Tga Tua Tuatahi: New Zealand Journal of Infant and Toddler Education, 11(1), 16-18 Degotardi, S., Torr, J., & Nguyen, N.T (2016). Infant-toddler educator’ language support practices during snack-time. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 41(4), 52-62 Degotardi, S. (2010). High-quality interactions with infants: Relationships with early childhood practitioners’ interpretations and qualification levels in play and routine contexts. International Journal of Early Years Education, 18(1), 27-41. Girolametto, L., Weitzman, E., van Lieshout, R., & Dawna, D. (2000). Directiveness in teachers' language input to toddlers and preschoolers in day care. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 43, 1101-1114. Hallam, R. A., Fouts, H. N., Bargreen, K. N., & Perkins, K. (2016). Teacher-child interactions during mealtimes: Observations of toddlers in high subsidy child care centres. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44, 51-59. doi:10.1007/s10643-014-0678-x Klette, T., Drugli, M.B., & Aandahl, A.M (2018). Together and alone: a study of interactions between toddlers and childcare providers during mealtime in Norwegian childcare centres. Early Child Development and Care, 188(3), 287-298, Doi: 10.1080/03004430.2016.1220943 Mortlock, A. (2015). Toddlers’ use of peer rituals at mealtime: symbols of togetherness and otherness. International Journal of Early Years Education, 23(4), 426-435. doi: 10.1080/09669760.2015.1096237-1 Tamis-LeMonda, C.S., Custode, S., Kuchiriko, Y., Escobar, K., & Lo, T. (2018). Routine language: Speech directed to infants during home activities. Child Development, doi: 10.111/cdev.13089 |
||
24th & 31st Aug |
Relationship-based pedagogies
|
Read at least 6 from: Degotardi, S. (2017). Joint attention in infant-toddler early childhood programs: Its dynamics and potential for collaborative learning. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 18(4), 409-421, doi: 10.1177/1463949117742786. Degotardi, S. & Pearson, (2014). The relationship worlds of infants and toddlers: Multiple perspectives from early years theory and practice (Chapter 3, 4, 5 or 6 – up to p.81). Maidenhead, Open University Press. Degotardi, S. (2015). Mind mindedness: Forms, features and implications for infant-toddler pedagogy. In S. Robson & S. F. Quinn (Eds.), Routledge International Handbook of Young Children's Thinking. London: Routledge. Elfer, P. (2006) Exploring children's expressions of attachment in nursery. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 14, 81-95. Hannikainen, M., (2015). The teacher's lap - a site of emotional well-being for the younger children in day-care groups. Early Child Development and Care, 185(5), 752-765, doi: 10.1080/03004430.2014.957690 McGaha, C. G., Cummings, R., Lippard, B. & Dallas, K. (2012) Relationship building: infants, toddlers, and 2-year-olds. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 13(1). Shin, M. (2010). Peeking at the relationship world of infant friends and caregivers. Journal of early childhood research, 8(3), 294-302. doi: 10.1177/1476718X10366777 Recchia, S.L., Shin, M., & Snaider, C. (2018). Where is the love? Developing loving relationships as an essential component of professional infant care. International Journal of Early Years Education, 26(2), doi: 10.1080/09669760.2018.1461614 Williams, S. T., Mastergeorge, A. M. & Ontai, L. L. (2010) Caregiver involvement in infant peer interactions: Scaffolding in a social context. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 251-266. |
||
Video-Log entry 2 due Friday 4th September |
||||
7. 7th Sept |
Project Preparation |
Please ensure that you book a Zoom consultation with the unit convener at least 1 week prior to submitting Assignment 2: project proposal
|
||
Assignment 2: Project Proposal due Wednesday 16th September |
||||
14th & 21st Sept |
Mid session recess |
|||
28th Sept |
Project implementation |
|||
5th Oct |
||||
12th Oct |
||||
19th Oct |
Prepare for Presentation |
|||
Assignment 3a: Presentation due during scheduled Zoom meeting on Saturday 24th October Assignment 3b: Peer Feedback due Monday 26th October |
||||
26th Oct |
Project completion and report writing |
|||
Assignment 5 due Sunday 8th November |
||||
Macquarie University policies and procedures are accessible from Policy Central (https://staff.mq.edu.au/work/strategy-planning-and-governance/university-policies-and-procedures/policy-central). Students should be aware of the following policies in particular with regard to Learning and Teaching:
Students seeking more policy resources can visit the Student Policy Gateway (https://students.mq.edu.au/support/study/student-policy-gateway). It is your one-stop-shop for the key policies you need to know about throughout your undergraduate student journey.
If you would like to see all the policies relevant to Learning and Teaching visit Policy Central (https://staff.mq.edu.au/work/strategy-planning-and-governance/university-policies-and-procedures/policy-central).
Macquarie University students have a responsibility to be familiar with the Student Code of Conduct: https://students.mq.edu.au/study/getting-started/student-conduct
Results published on platform other than eStudent, (eg. iLearn, Coursera etc.) or released directly by your Unit Convenor, are not confirmed as they are subject to final approval by the University. Once approved, final results will be sent to your student email address and will be made available in eStudent. For more information visit ask.mq.edu.au or if you are a Global MBA student contact globalmba.support@mq.edu.au
Macquarie University provides a range of support services for students. For details, visit http://students.mq.edu.au/support/
Learning Skills (mq.edu.au/learningskills) provides academic writing resources and study strategies to help you improve your marks and take control of your study.
The Library provides online and face to face support to help you find and use relevant information resources.
Students with a disability are encouraged to contact the Disability Service who can provide appropriate help with any issues that arise during their studies.
For all student enquiries, visit Student Connect at ask.mq.edu.au
If you are a Global MBA student contact globalmba.support@mq.edu.au
For help with University computer systems and technology, visit http://www.mq.edu.au/about_us/offices_and_units/information_technology/help/.
When using the University's IT, you must adhere to the Acceptable Use of IT Resources Policy. The policy applies to all who connect to the MQ network including students.
In 2018, student presented via Voicethread. Due to student feedback, a real-time presentation, via Zoom, has been re-instated. Students felt that this would provide them with better opportunities to receive and give feedback.